Valentine v. Torres-Quezada et al

Filing 174

ORDER TO DEFENDANTS TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTION TO SEAL SHOULD NOT BE DENIED. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 8/29/2024. Show Cause Response due by 9/4/2024. (kkp, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/29/2024)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

JAVONTAE VALENTINE,
Plaintiff,

8
v.

9
10

TORRES-QUEZADA, et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 22-cv-01520-JSW
ORDER TO DEFENDANTS TO SHOW
CAUSE WHY MOTION TO SEAL
SHOULD NOT BE DENIED
Re: Dkt. No. 170

12
On August 16, 2024, the parties filed supplemental briefs relating to Defendants’ motion in

13
14

limine number 1. Plaintiff filed an administrative motion to seal documents that Defendants

15

designated as confidential or confidential attorneys’ eye only. (Dkt. No. 168, Declaration of

16

Xiaolin Sunny Chen (“Chen Decl.”), Exs. D-G (under seal versions at Docket Nos. 170-1 through

17

170-4).) Defendants have not filed a declaration demonstrating why Exhibits E, F, and G should

18

be maintained under seal, as required by Northern District Civil Local Rule 79-5.
On that same day, Defendants filed a declaration stating that Defendants had produced

19
20

documents to Plaintiff regarding investigations of inmate grievances and that “documents

21

comprising the investigations are highly confidential.” (Dkt. No. 169, Declaration of Jean M.

22

Trenbeth ¶ 4.) Defendants attached redacted versions of the documents produced to Plaintiff,

23

including a copy of Chen Declaration Exhibit D. (Trenbeth Decl., Exs. A-D.) The Court

24

concludes that Trenbeth Declaration is not sufficient to establish that the materials should be

25

sealed.

26

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Defendants to show cause why Plaintiff’s motion to seal

27

should not be denied and why the Court should not direct Defendants to file unredacted versions

28

of Exhibits A-D of the Trenbeth Declaration. Defendants’ response to this Order to Show Cause

1

shall be filed by September 4, 2024. The Court specifically advises Defendants that a simple

2

reference to the terms of the protective order will not be sufficient. Rather, Defendants shall

3

specify the particular reasons these exhibits, or portions thereof, should remain under seal.

4
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 29, 2024
______________________________________
JEFFREY S. WHITE
United States District Judge

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2